Loading...
1991-01-16 :.;~, '--' ~EENSBURY ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FIRST REGULAR MEETING JANUARY 16TH, 1991 INDEX Use Variance No. 4-1991 James M. Weller. P.E. 1. Owner: West Glens Falls Emergency Squad. Inc. Area Variance No. 3-1991 James M. Weller. P.E. 7. Owner: West Glens Falls Emergency Squad, Inc. Area Variance No. 1-1991 James & Peggy Grich 11. Area Variance No. 2-1991 James W. Parrish 19. Owner: James & Lois Parrish THESE ARE NOT OFFICIALLY ADOPTED MINUTES AND ARE SUBJECT TO BOARD AND STAFF REVISIONS. REVISIONS WILL APPEAR ON THE FOLLOWING MONTHS MINUTES (IF ANY) AND WILL STATE SUCH APPROVAL OF SAID MINUTES. ----' ~EENSBURY ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FIRST REGULAR MEETING JANUARY 16TH, 1991 7:30 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT THEODORE TURNER. CHAIRMAN SUSAN GOETZ. SECRETARY CHARLES SICARD BRUCE CARR JEFFREY KELLEY JOYCE EGGLESTON MICHAEL SHEA TOWN ATTORNEY-PAUL DUSEK ZONING ADMINISTRATOR-PAT COLLARD PLANNER-JOHN GORALSKI STENOGRAPHER-MARIA GAGLIARDI CORRECTION OF MINUTES November 28th. 1990: Page 26. first Mr. Kelley up from the bottom. the last two sentences. we're going to gain six feet of relief more from the waterfront. sib from the waterfront setback of 75 feet; Page 60. third Mr. Kelley up from the bottom. NAPA State. sib Knapp estate; Page 5. first Mrs. Eggleston down from the top. sentence ended with "deeded over to him" MOTION TO APPROYE MINUTES OF NOYEMBER 28TH, 1990 AS CORRECTED. Introduced by Charles Sicard who moved for its adoption. seconded by Joyce Eggleston: Duly adopted this 16th day of January. 1991. by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Carr. Mrs. Eggleston. Mr. Sicard. Mrs. Goetz. Mr. Kelley. Mr. Turner NOES: NONE ABSTAINED: Mr. Shea NEW BUSINESS: USE YARIANCE NO. 4-1991 TYPE: UNLISTED CR-15 JAMES M. WELLER, P.E. OWNER: WEST GLENS FALLS EMERGENCY S~AD, INC. CORINTH ROAD, EAST OF 1-87 FOR THE REJl)YAL OF THE EXISTING FACILITY AND CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW, ENERGY EFFICIENT, LOW MAINTENANCE FACILITY. (WARREN COUNTY PLANNING) TAX MAP NO. 129-1-24 LOT SIZE: 32,127.74 SQ. FT. SECTION 4.020-1 THOMAS VANDEWATER. REPRESENTING THE APPLICANT. PRESENT (7:30 p.m.) MR. TURNER-I'm going to take the agenda out of order a little bit and I'm going to grant the West Glens Falls Emergency Squad. we'll take their application first. STAFF INPUT Notes from John Goralski. Planner. Use Variance No. 4-1991. James M. Weller for the West Glens Falls Emergency Squad. dated January 9. 1991. Meeting Date: January 16. 1991 "The use proposed for this property is not listed as an allowable use in any zone. It has. therefore. been determined that a variance would be required for this use in any zone. Obviously. convenient access to major roadways is essential when locating any Emergency Service facility. Proximity to Corinth Road. 1-87. and the traffic signal make this an appropriate location for such a facility. The West Glens Falls Emergency Squad has been operating from this location for several years. A tour of the existing facility would immediately illustrate the need for a larger building. This project will not change the character of the neighborhood and will have a positive impact on public services." MR. VANDEWATER-Thomas Vandewater. Vice President of J.M. Weller Associates. I also have with me tonight Mr. William Keswick from the Emergency Squad. MR. TURNER-How long have they owned the property? You said several years. What has it been. like. two years? Did you own it in '88? You just bought it in '88 didn't you. in the summer? WILLIAM KESWICK MR. KESWICK-Yes. 1 MR. TURNER-Do you know what month that was? As the Staff input indicates. they're here because it's not defined in the Ordinance anywhere for an emergency squad. You are a separate entity? MR. KESWICK-I'm Bill Keswick. I'm Chairman of the Building Committee for the West Glens Falls Emergency Squad. That's correct. We're a separate incorporation. MRS. EGGLESTON-Mr. Keswick. what are the plans for the use of the expansion? I mean. is this going to turn into a social hall for wedding receptions and bingo games and whatnot? MR. KESWICK-I'd answer that definitely not. MRS. EGGLESTON-That definitely is not? MR. KESWICK-This is a fixed based operation. We have several members who do not live in close enough proximity to the emergency squad building to allow access to the emergency vehicles within what we consider a three minute response time. So. we have generally people there in the evening who bunk into the emergency room. As we've indicated. the only use for that meeting room will be meetings and squad training and emergency EMS Type training. MR. SICARD-Aren't there facilities there. now. to stay over night? MR. KESWICK- The facilities. as you may be aware. are a gas station which is approximately 20 years old. The membership. working together. remodeled what would be the back oil storage room of the gas station. There's barely room to walk between the bunks. It is serviceable. but it's really not habitable or convenient. MR. SICARD-So. what you're saying is. they don't stay there then. all night? MR. KESWICK-Yes. we have people that stay there right now. MR. SICARD-You do? All night? MR. KESWICK- Yes. MRS. GOETZ-They do? 24 hours? I mean. it's covered by people. actuallY there? MR. KESWICK-We rotate on eight duty crews. The duty crews serve from 6 p.m. to 6 a.m. Some of the duty crews live within close proximity. say. Captain Dick Zack who lives just down on Big Boom. He can respond in adequate time from his residence. We have some folks who come from as far as Lake George. They come down at 6 o'clock at night and theY'll stay around until 6 o'clock in the morning. During the day. we have the ambulance assigned to various drivers and emergency response people. It's sort a very sophisticated and fairly complicated who goes where. so that we can provide emergency coverage for the community. MR. TURNER-You have two vehicles in-house? MR. KESWICK-That's correct. MR. TURNER-Are you going to add after you build onto the facility? MR. KESWICK- There is consi derable di scussi on. both on a County and Townwi de. about provi ding a blazer type vehicle to provide advance life support for the community. and that's the need for the third bay. MRS. GOETZ-When you have training sessions. would these parking spaces be adequate? MR. KESWICK-Yes. they would. MR. SHEA-Bill. how about in the long view. going forward? I mean. this is an expansion of the facility to improve the services. obviously. beyond that which you have now. What about three. five years down the road? Will this property be adequate enough or will you then have to look for a new location? MR. KESWICK-Part of that question can be addressed. I personally went down and spent a shift riding with the Town of Colonie and they have a very sophisticated. very well developed basic life support ambulance system and advance life support ambulance system. That's what's driving the discussions. now. about an additional quick response advanced life support vehicle that in the future. maybe four. five. ten years down the road. will put us in the ability to provide the same level of service that's provided in the Town of Colonie. MR. SHEA-So. it appears that the amount of land that you have there and the location are something you could live with for a good length of time going forward? MR. KESWICK-Yes, definitely. 2 MR. TURNER-Any other questions? MR. SICARD-Was there any thought given to possibly putting an addition on the existing building? haven't been in the building. so I don't know what the inside looks like. MR. KESWICK-Well. we had two separate proposals drawn up. One was to add to the existing building and the other was tear to the ground and build from new. Originally. I was of the proposal. we can build onto this building. Unfortunately. the multi peak roof that's on the existing building puts you into a flat roof addition and you end up with a very unworkable building with a very complex roof structure that just didn't seem practical and when it came down to dollars for dollars. you're putting an awful lot of money into adding onto a 20 year old building. You still only get a door that is two and a half inches wider than the ambulance on each side. if you build onto the existing building. MRS. EGGLESTON-Some of my concerns. I think. are the traffic flows. especially if they widen the road and take some of the front. Are you going to be left with enough space. down the road. for what you're going to need for parking. and as you know it's hard getting out of there. and I live right near that corner. It's not easy by any means. MR. SICARD-They've done an excellent job. there. and I'm very glad they're there. However. the front of the building is a nice looking building. It was well done. with the brick veneer and so forth and well built. and to remove the utilities and the sign and everything. it would seem to me that it would be a lot less expensive. in the long run. to build the addition on the back and end up with the same amount of square footage. Many roofs in the area are flat. I'm very familiar with that type of construction and I know they're not the best. but there are bigger roofs. They prove adequate in the long run. So. we're in an era of time now where tax payers dollars are counted and that area also. I might ask the architect. do they have a figure on the renovation. a ball park figure on renovating it. including the demolition and so forth of everything? MR. VANDEWATER-I think the price that we worked up on a conceptual basis and given to the emergency squad has be $330.000. MR. SICARD-$330.000? MR. VANDEWATER-Correct. MR. SICARD-Apparently. there were some questi ons about the additi on. Di d they come up with a fi gure on that? MR. KESWICK-I would say. off the top of my head. that the addition was in the neighborhood of $280 to $290.000. MR. SICARD-It would seem to me that it wouldn't be quite that much. where they don't have to take this one down and start over. MR. VANDEWATER-Well. we were trying to make. under the renovations and alterations and the additions. trying to give them a completed project with an energy efficient facility. The existing building is very. very inadequately insulated. MR. SICARD-Of course. insulation is not that big an expense. as you probably know more than I do. but to make it energy efficient. I wouldn't think it would be that great a problem. MRS. GOETZ-How will this be financed. this whole project? Is it a tax payer financing? MR. KESWICK-That's correct. What we planned to do. we've saved money for a significant down payment and then we would get a mortgage for the remainder. MRS. EGGLESTON-The space is being increased by. I think. a little more than double. if my figures are right. How many people do you contemplate might stay in that building at a given time? I mean. this is going to be a good sized building when you're finished with it. How many people do you estimate might be staying in the building. that you would need quarters for? MR. KESWICK-Do I understand the question to be. how many people would be on night duty? MRS. EGGLESTON-Yes. that would be staying there overnight? MR. KESWICK-A maximum of six. MRS. EGGLESTON-You'd need six bed facilities? MR. KESWICK-Correct. 3 MRS. EGGLESTON-I was going to say. for training. I think the West Glens Falls Fire house has adequate space which they probably would be more than willing to share to save cost. It just seems like. the way things are today. it's such a waste and reallY the traffic kind of scares me right there. MRS. GOETZ-What happens now when an ambulance has to come out? How do you get the traffic to stop? Does somebody go out there and just literally say. out? MR. KESWICK-You turn on the lights and you turn on the siren and you edge your way out until the car on your left stops and then you edge out into that lane until the car on your right stops. MRS. EGGLESTON-Yes. MR. KESWICK-We did that 1.326 times in 1990. MR. SICARD-I don't think that's going to change any by this added facility. MRS. GOETZ-I don't either. MR. KESWICK-No. The only thing that will be of benefit is we have we have taken that center island that currently houses the sign and spread it apart so that we'll get a better view. the traffic will have a much better view of the ambulance as it pulls into the traffic pattern. MR. KELLEY-I guess the thing we're talking about is a use variance and I guess the primary question would be. you seem to have addressed the fact that you've got room for growth and I guess my question to go along with that would be. have you looked at any other sites as possibilities or are there any others within the proximity that you think you have to be. to be centrally located or whatever your criteria is. or have you just. because you've got this. you've stayed with it and didn't explore any other a venues? MR. KESWICK-We have not explored any further sites and the reasoning being. we really like the particular site that we are at. We're two right turns to be on the Northway. We can be at Exit 19 in two minutes and fifteen seconds. We can be at Exit 20 in about four and a half minutes. It's just an ideal site for accessing the major parts of our District. MRS. EGGLESTON-Jeff. one thing. as you know. West Glens Falls Fire has a sizeable piece of property and I know when thi s was bought by the Rescue Squad. that property was offered to them free. between the Fire house and where the old florist shop or LEDFOOT is now. So there is a considerable chunk of land there that was offered for a facility such as this. MR. KELLEY-And when you say you are a separate entity. you are no longer a part of West Glens Falls Fi re Company? MR. KESWICK-Right. We're a separate corporation. MR. KELLEY-It used to be together. as I remember. MR. KESWICK-That's correct. also. MR. KELLEY-Okay. They've split. Okay. MRS. GOETZ-It seems like we're concerned. to some extent. about the cost. here. it's obvious. but I'm not sure that we can consider that. MR. SHEA-That's not an issue before us. MR. TURNER-That's not an issue. MRS. GOETZ-Right. I have another question. Why does this come before us. because I'm thinking about the Bay Ridge Fire Department was taken off the agenda? Can you explain that? MR. DUSEK-Yes. My office researched it. at the request of somebody. I don't know if it was Pat or John. and we found an opinion dealing expressly with rescue squads that said because they are not a governmental agency. like. for instance. if it was the Town itself wanting to put a rescue squad station there. we could do it. but because it's a private corporation. they're not automatically exempt and because of your provisions under the nonconforming. or the expansion of a nonconforming use under Article IX. that triggers the need for a use variance. MR. SHEA-Are they not some kind of quasi body. given the funding that they get? MR. DUSEK-We checked that. but there didn't seem to be enough of a basis to go that route. so we stuck with the safer opinion because we do have an Attorney General's opinion or State Controller's opinion that actually says that they don't qualify. but that would be the argument to be made. I think. on the other side of the fence. MR. SHEA-So. everyone qualifies for money. but other things you don't qualify for? 4 --' MR. GORALSKI-Right. MR. SICARD-Paul. does that apply even though they're using the Town funds? MR. TURNER- It doesn't ma ke any di fference. They've stepped away from the Fi re Company and gone on their own. established their own corporation. MR. SICARD-I understand that. but the cost of it is being borne by the tax payers. It's the other side of the corner. here. some place. They wouldn't have to come in here. Does that apply. even though the Town is supporting this. they're not only going to give the funds to it. but they're going to support it afterwards and everything? Does this still apply? MR. DUSEK-Yes. I think the important thing to understand is that this is a private corporation. which mayor may not continue to do rescue squad service for the Town. The only thing that allows them to do the service work is the fact that they have a contract with the Town. They're no different than any contractor. as far as the Town Government's concerned. They have a service. We pay for that service. At some point in time. if they Town had wanted to. or if they want to. at the end of their contract. they may not have to renew it. MR. SICARD-But are you saying that they're not included in an allocation. yearly. for Town funds? MR. DUSEK-They are. MR. SICARD-They ~ on an allocation? MR. DUSEK-Well. we budget. the Town Board budgets it for that expense. just like they budget for any other expense. improving Town buildings or anything else. MR. SICARD-Wouldn't that in itself put them in a category that they're part of the Town. that the Town is supporting or is going to support? MR. CARR-No. it's not like a department line item. This is a contract line item. MR. DUSEK-I think if anything might put them into a classification of quasi governmental or being like government is the very nature of thei r functi on. Tradi ti ona lly. fi re depa rtments. although bei ng voluntary in many areas as they developed have become government functions over time and just the fact that the government. obviously. contracts to provide that service gives you some argument. I think. to say that they are like a government function. but the funding. in and of itself. I don't feel triggers that. MRS. GOETZ-But you mean the West Glens Falls Emergency Squad. at the end of a contract. could choose to not do it anymore and the tax payers will have paid for the building? That seems a little screwed up. MR. DUSEK-No. The tax payers will not have paid for the building. What happens is that when the Town contracts with the Rescue Squad there is an arrangement made by which they are given so much money for that year to provide the Rescue Squad services. Now. what they do with the money. obviously. the Town Board has a great deal of say over because of the close relationship. but the bottom line is that they are not paid. their entire building. usually. is not paid off in one sum. but rather they'll mortgage their building. In turn. they'll add that into the total amounts that they want from the Town. In fact. it's only been within the past couple of years that the Town has come to a point where they're giving full funding to the fire departments and rescue squads. Before that time. the rescue squads and fire departments would have to go out and solicit funds. in addition to asking the Town Board to contract with them for services. but the bottom line is that if the contract should end. because of one of the parties. the building mayor may not be paid for at that point. If it's not. then they're responsible for it. not the Town. MRS. EGGLESTON-But it h tax payers dollars? MR. DUSEK-That is funding the building. yes. MR. KELLEY-The onlY thing I would say is if it's full funding. why do we get letters in the mail asking for donations? MR. DUSEK-Well. when I use the term "full funding". I don't mean in terms of. that we're covering every possible expense that they might have. but basicallY the Town Board has assumed a posture. from what I can see and from what I'm reading in the papers. as I'm sure you have. that they're trying to provide a much better contractual relationship so that they don't have to engage in the type of fund raising events that they've had to in the past. Not to say that they still can't raise money. I mean. that's perfectly legal for them to do so and if they have other things that they want to add to their department. above and beyond what the Town is willing to contract for. I think that's certainly within their rights to do that and that may be why you still see some funding. 5 -/ MR. KELLEY-So. will this have to go for a site plan review? I would assume. MR. TURNER-Yes. MRS. GOETZ-Where do you do the training now. because you said that you need the larger facility? MR. KESWICK-We take the ambulances out and we put blankets down on the floor of the truck bay and we do training in the truck bay. MR. TURNER-Any further questions? Okay. Let me open the public hearing. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED NOCOÞIŒNT PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED CORRESPONDENCE Warren County Planning Board returned approving with comments. "Pursue options of a traffic signal. if necessary." MR. TURNER-Do you want to discuss it any further or are you content with the testimony that's been presented? MR. KELLEY-If you look at the Ordinance and the permitted uses are single family dwellings and duplexes. but site plan reviews have I would say similar types of things. in terms of traffic flow and sizes of buildings that might be put there. MR. TURNER-Yes. MR. KELLEY-So. I don't know that you could say that this would be more detrimental than any of the other uses under a site plan and they are there. I think I would have to agree with them that their location. in terms of access to the Northway and getting to the Mall and the Million Dollar Mile or whatever it is. would be important that they respond quickly. MR. TURNER-Right. Anyone else? None? Okay. motion's in order. MOTION TO APPROVE USE VARIANCE NO. 4-1991 JAMES M. WELLER WEST GLENS FALLS EMERGENCY S~AD, INC.. Introduced by Michael Shea who moved for its adoption. seconded by Charles Sicard: I believe that since the West Glens Falls Emergency Squad has been operating successfully and to the benefit of the community for several years in that same location and that they wish to continue with expanded services. that they be granted this Use Variance. This variance would not be detrimental to the Ordinance nor would it effect public services. but rather public services would be enhanced. Duly adopted this 16th day of January. 1991. by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Shea. Mr. Kelley. Mrs. Goetz. Mr. Sicard. Mrs. Eggleston. Mr. Carr. Mr. Turner NOES: NONE MR. DUSEK-Not to muddy things up or make it more complicated. but as I'm tossing through the legalities in my mind. here. of the different issues. let me just throw this out to the Board because I think it's really. it's such a close call that it reallY goes more into your prerogative as to make a final call. here. As I reconsider everything. including the opinion that I have a copy of and also Mike. here. is whispering into my ear about some things that are happening up in Lake George. but I think that. I'll go out on a limb and say that I think that a case can be made to argue that this could be a quasi governmental function and. therefore. not need the variance or any variances for that matter. or to continue going down the path that you're going. It's such a close call that I think the Board could decide to go either way. The only thing I would caution you on is that the reason why it's before you. obviously. is because the more conservative call. for the Zoning Administrator as well as my office to make is to say it does need variances because what that does is allow the Boards to have a review of it to make sure that it's not going to cause any particular community problems and also to give people in the surrounding area a right to be heard. That's the pro side of it and that gets it before you. The only thing I would caution you on is if you decide to go quasi governmental and say that's what it is and therefore no variances. keep in mind that that's a decision that will stand for all other rescue squads and fire departments that may be subsequently rebuilt or built in the Town. but I think it's so close that. as an attorney. I've got to tell you I think I can argue the case either way and I think it should be your call to decide which way you want to go with it. MR. TURNER-Mike. you made the motion. Any comment? 6 MR. SHEA-I be1ieve it to be a quasi governmental agency of sorts. However. I think the review process is a healthy one. As you pointed out. the fact that the surrounding neighbors and towns folk do have an opportunity to speak out on the issue is a healthy one and so I would opt for continuing the process of granting it. hopefully. granting it a variance. MR. GORALSKI-Mr. Chairman. Paul gave me a chance to catch my breath and I suggest that you review the Short Environmental Assessment Form and do the SEQRA before you vote on the motion. MR. TURNER-Yes. we will. Michael. do you want to introduce that into the record. the SEQRA. MR. SHEA-Do we just have to say that we've reviewed this and that there's no impact? MR. GORALSKI-I would suggest that you read through the entire thing and answer the questions. MR. TURNER-Now. we'll take the area variance. (8:05 p.m.) AREA VARIANCE NO. 3-1991 TYPE: UNLISTED CR-15 JAJES M. WELLER, P.E. OWNER: WEST GLENS FALLS EMERGENCY SQUAD, INC. CORINTH ROAD, EAST OF 1-87 FOR THE ROOVAL OF THE EXISTING FACILITY AND CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW FACILITY. A MINIMUM OF ONE ACRE IS RE~IRED TO ESTABLISH A NEV USE IN THIS ZONE. (WARREN COUNTY PLANNING) TAX MAP NO. 129-1-24 LOT SIZE: 32,127.74 SQ. FT. SECTION 4.020-1 THOMAS VANDEWATER. REPRESENTING APPLICANT. PRESENT (8:05 p.m.) STAFF INPUT Notes from John Goralski. Planner. Area Variance No. 3-1991. James M. Weller for West Glens Falls Emergency Squad. dated January 9. 1991. Meeting Date: January 16. 1991 "It has been determined that 1 acre of land is required for the Emergency Squad to build a new building at their present site. Given the fact they have been operating from this site for several years and are in need for an expanded facility in order to properly serve the community. the variance seems appropriate. Given the requirements for locating an Emergency Service facility and the fact that the squad has been operating from this location. a specific practical difficulty would result if the variance were not granted. Because this proposal would provide an essential community service and would not impact the character of the neighborhood. it will not be detrimental to the Ordinance or to other property in the area." MR. TURNER-Okay. That relates to that. and then the other issue I raised today, and I checked with Pat. and under the Ordinance. a buffer is required between the cemetery and any commercial use and we should take that issue tonight. even though I don't think it was advertised, but the last time we had a case on the other side of the cemetery with Pizza Hut and the parking comes right up to the very wall of that cemetery on that bank and they had to put retainers in there to take care of it. MRS. GOETZ-And this came back. this notice of this hearing came back from the Hebrew Congregation of Seratiphela and it said insufficient address and it just said West Glens Falls, New York. So. these people haven't had a chance to say anything. Is this the Temple or the Synagogue that owns that. or is it together? MR. GORALSKI-That is the address that is on the Tax Roll, and that's where we send it to. That's what we do is we use the tax records to send out our notices. and it ~ advertised in the Post Star. MRS. GOETZ-But you know how some people are not. they're just not reading that first thing when they open the paper. MR. CARR-But we can only do our best. MR. SHEA-What kind of buffer is needed there? MR. TURNER-A 50 foot. MR. CARR-But then doesn't it come down to whether this is commercial or quasi governmental? Is there a difference between a governmental function and a commercial function? MR. TURNER-Well. you look up commercial and it says, service. They're providing a service. MR. GORALSKI-As Mr. O'Connor whispers to us again, there is a 50 foot buffer zone between the Hebrew cemetery and the Emergency Squad facility. The 50 foot buffer is actually to the Town cemetery. Their variance would be between the Town cemetery and the building. MR. KELLEY-I thought a buffer zone couldn't have anything in it? MR. TURNER-It can't. MR. KELLEY-Well. the plan I have says that it's 30 feet from the parking lot to the Hebrew cemetery. 7 MR. GORALSKI-To the trees. MR. CARR-To the trees. yes. the revised tree line. MR. KELLEY-Okay. All right. MR. SHEA-Well. there's not a 50 foot buffer between the Town cemetery and Pizza Hut, is there? MR. TURNER-No. That's what brought the buffer on. for the cemeteries. believe it or not. was the Pizza Hut. That's reallY what brought it on. MR. CARR-So. Ted. if I've got this right. they need a setback variance from this buffer setback? MR. TURNER-Yes, that's 50 feet. MR. CARR-They need a variance from the minimum lot size? MR. TURNER-No. There's a variance on the minimum lot size because they've got to have an acre. here. MR. CARR-Right. So there's two variances they need? MRS. COLLARD-Yes. two variances. MR. CARR-Okay. MR. SHEA-What is the earthen drive? Who's property is that? MR. TURNER-The Town has a right-of-way. Let's see, boundary by agreement, right here. The right-of-way is right here. Look under where it says. note, with the arrow on each side, five foot right-of-way. It says. Town has permanent easement for purposes of ingress and egress, right here. MR. KELLEY-Where's the property line of the cemetery? Which one of these lines is it? MR. GORALSKI-Maybe Mr. Vandewater can answer that. MR. VANDEWATER-There's an easement and a right-of-way. as indicated on the site plan and it's basicallY described as follows: The Emergency Squad owns the land to the property line and grants a right-of-way. The Town of Queensbury has right-of-way over the Emergency Squad land by the shaded part indicated. An additional right-of-way to the east, also. which is the end shaded portion. over to the easement line and the entire right-of-way. as described from the information that we obtained. The Town of Queensbury has right-of-ways for public use. So that would include the shaded area plus a line that's indicated to the east. MRS. GOETZ-So we're talking about granting a variance from the required buffer on the east side? MR. TURNER- Yes. MR. CARR-Twenty eight feet. I think. MR. KELLEY-Yes. I think what we're saying on your map, the distance from the proposed Emergency Squad building to the property line is 22 feet? MR. TURNER-Yes. WILLIAM KESWICK MR. KESWICK-That's correct. MR. KELLEY-All right. and we're saying that this is the property line also of the cemetery. I'm saying, we have to give the variance from the property line. So. I think this is the joint property line. is what I'm saying. right. It's not. this is their property line and the cemetery's property line is over here some place and then there's a no man's land in the middle. I think that is the joint line. MR. TURNER-Which one. The one in the middle is a joint line. you're saying? MR. SHEA-Yes. MR. TURNER-Hebrew Congregation limits of right-of-way is this line right here. MRS. GOETZ-What's the actual dimension that they're requesting? 8 "- MR. TURNER-They don't have it on there. That's why I raised the question today. MR. GORALSKI-A 50 foot buffer zone is requi red from the property li ne of the cemetery to the Rescue Squad. MR. CARR-Any development. MR. GORALSKI-Any development. right. MR. CARR-The sidewalk. the driveway. MR. GORALSKI-Right. MR. CARR-They're under legal obligation to keep a driveway there for the Town of Queensbury's right-of-way. easement. MR. GORALSKI-It's already there. MR. CARR-That's right. and they can't change it. MR. GORALSKI-What they cannot do is put anything new in that buffer zone. MR. TURNER-Yes. MR. GORALSKI-So whatever the closest new construction is would be where the variance is to. MR. CARR-Which is the sidewalk. MR. GORALSKI-Correct. MR. CARR-Which looks to be, approximately. 12 feet from their property line. MR. TURNER-Thirty five feet of relief is what they've got to have. MR. GORALSKI-The sidewalk is 15 feet from the property line and that's where your buffer zone. that's the first encroachment on your buffer zone. MR. SHEA-However, it should be noted that the building itself is now actually. the proposed building is going to have a greater setback than the existing one now has. MR. GORALSKI-That's correct. MR. TURNER-Right. MR. KELLEY-Is that our only variance we're after? MR. TURNER-No. We've got two variances, one for that buffer and one for the area. MR. SICARD-When do you intend to start this building, construction. Do you have a set date on this? MR. VANDEWATER-We have a contract with the West Glens Falls Emergency Squad. MR. SICARD-I was getting to that. Does that go up for bid. or how is this handled. I see Weller's written plans. MR. VANDEWATER-We're going to be submitting a proposal. MR. SICARD-A proposal? MR. VANDEWATER-Yes. MR. SICARD-Will it go up for bid? MR. KESWICK-At this point. we have chosen to work very closely with the Weller Corporation. largely on the recommendation of both the West Glens Falls Fire and the Bay Ridge Fire which has had the successful completion of two buildings with them. At this point, we have not consummated any building contract. MR. TURNER-Are you going with brick front? MR. KESWICK-That's correct. MR. TURNER-Steel building? 9 ----' MR. KESSLER-That's correct. MR. TURNER-Pitched roof to the rear? MR. VANDEWATER-No. It's a gabled roof. MR. TURNER-Gabled roof? MR. VANDEWATER-Double slope. MR. SICARD-Paul. I might ask. if it was a Town entity. then. it would have to go up for bid. wouldn't it. necessarily. if it came under the umbrella of the Town? MR. TURNER-Yes. It sure would. MR. DUSEK-Yes. If the Town undergoes a construction project. anything over $7.000 is required to be put out to public bid. MR. SICARD-But because the way it's set up. here as a contractor. then it doesn't really have to. does it? MR. DUSEK-Because it's not a government agency. MR. SICARD-Then the tax payers still pay for it. MR. DUSEK-That's correct. MR. SICARD-That's a pretty good arrangement. MR. CARR-Well, the tax payers only pay for it by contract. If they don't want to contract with them. they just don't hire them and then West Glens Falls have to pay for it themselves. MR. SICARD-Well. they pay for it regardless of cost. actually. MRS. GOETZ-What's the relief needed for the lot size variance? MR. TURNER-The lot size is 32.127.74. MR. KELLEY-Isn't it a CR-15 Zone? MR. TURNER- Yes. MR. KELLEY-So they have more land than necessary. don't they? MR. KESSLER-About three quarters of an acre. MR. TURNER-They've got three quarters of an acre. yes. They need an acre for any other allowable use in the zone. That's the Catch-22. MR. KELLEY-I was going to say. I missed something somewhere. MR. TURNER-Yes. MR. TURNER-Okay. No further questions? I'll open the public hearing. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED NO COMMENT PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED CORRESPONDENCE Warren County Planning Board approved MR. TURNER-Okay. A motion's in order. MOTION TO APPROVE AREA VARIANCE 11). 3-1991 JAMES M. WELLER WEST GLE(IS FALLS EMERGENCY ~AD, INC.. Introduced by Jeffrey Kelley who moved for its adoption, seconded by Charles Sicard: 10 --- They're requesting two variances. The first one being relief from the 50 foot buffer zone requirement because this borders a cemetery on the eastern property line. We're going to give a variance re1ief of 35 feet. The closest new construction to the property being a sidewalk which will be 15 feet at its closest point to this particular easterly property line. This seems to be a reasonable request in this particular case since the total lot is only in the neighborhood of 105.9 feet, at least on the southern boundary. They are limited as to how much they can move left and right on this piece of property. The second variance is for relief from the minimum lot size of one acre. This is a preexisting piece of property and contains 32,127 square feet and there is no adjoining land which is available for purchase. This particular property is bounded by Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation and two cemeteries. There seems to be no detrimental effect to the Ordinance and will not hinder public facilities. This would appear to be the minimum relief necessary to alleviate the practical difficulty. Duly adopted this 16th day of January. 1991. by the following vote: AYES: Mrs. Eggleston. Mr. Sicard. Mrs. Goetz. Mr. Kelley. Mr. Shea. Mr. Carr, Mr. Turner NOES: NONE (8:30 p.m.) AREA VARIANCE NO. 1-1991 TYPE II SR-IA JAMES I PEGGY GRICH OWNER: SAME AS ABOVE ONE MILE NORTH OF DIX AVENUE ON QUEENSBURY AVENUE (OLD COUNTY LINE ROAD) FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A 112 n. STOCKADE FENCE 6 n. IN HEIGHT ALONG FRONT BOUNDARY OF PROPERTY. (WARREN COUNTY PLANNING) TAX MAP NO. 109-5-9 LOT SIZE: ±1 ACRES SECTION 7.090-C, 7.091-B JAMES GRICH, PRESENT (8:30 p.m.) STAFF INPUT Notes from John Goralski. Planner. Area Variance No. 1-1991. James & Peggy Grich. dated January 9. 1991. Meeting Date: January 16. 1991 "The app1icant states in the application that traffic on Queensbury Avenue causes "Problems with normal living routines and interior damage to objects." The Board should consider whether this noise problem deprives the applicant of reasonable use of the property. The applicant has erected a six foot fence to alleviate the noise and problem. Strict application of the dimensional requirements would allow a four foot fence. This would not alleviate the practical difficulty created by the noise. The fence does not appear to be detrimental to the nei ghborhood and has no impact on pub1i c faciliti es and ser.vi ces. " MR. TURNER-Mr. long ago did you put the fence in Mr. Grich? MR. GRICH-James E. Grich. I believe it was two months ago. November. MRS. GOETZ-Did somebody just go by and see it and there was a complaint? MR. GRICH-Yes. Pat did. MRS. EGGLESTON-And how long have you owned the property? MR. TURNER-Two years. MR. GRICH-It'll be two years. almost two years. I believe. in March. We've actually lived there since. it'll be two years in February we purchased it. MR. TURNER-You were aware that the industrial park was there when you bought the property. right? MR. GRICH-Yes. but there wasn't quite as many trucks and traffic and there are many more buildings. now. than there used to be which the traffic flow has increased immensely. MR. TURNER-Yes. well. it would. That's why it's there. MR. GRICH-Right. One of the basic problems is the fact that we're on a hill because of the acceleration and deceleration of the vehicles. there's a big problem on that hill and we're the only ones on the hill and the noise level. as I stated, was just getting to the point where it was unreasonable. and I apologize for putting it up and not coming to you folks first. I didn't even realize that it was not in the zoning. but that doesn't change the fact that the decibel level is just unbelievable at that house. As a matter of fact, I was going to video tape and bring it in to you couldn't get the facilities here to do that. but I just feel that our standard of living has gone down tremendously because of that situation and the fact that I have to monitor the television station and I absolutely cannot do so. I cannot hear the audio unless the thing is blaring when the trucks are going up and down the road and it's an everyday occurrence. MR. TURNER-You didn't put a return on the northern end of it. towards the back property on that side. You don't get any noise from the trucks downshifting, from the north coming south? MR. GRICH-Some. but the fence is high enough or far enough up towards the north to alleviate that problem. 11 --- MR. TURNER-You don't pick up any noise on that side at all? MR. GRICH-There's a hill and there's woods. especially in the summer. with the woods there. MR. TURNER-Yes. there's a few. MR. GRICH-But as they pass. we're right in that midway point. I also wanted to give you some documents. here. that I have prepared. MR. TURNER-Okay. MR. GRICH-These are signatures and we went to our neighbors about three quarters of a mile up and three quarters of a mile down from our house and got si gnatures and asked them what they thought about the fence and all of them had positive comments. They said quote. one of them said. "It's about time someone started taking care of the neighborhood". and no one had any objections. They all signed the petition. The other thing that was presented to me was one of the people that plow had stopped at the house and said that they were concerned about doing some damage to the fence when they come up through and plow and so I wrote the letter to Mr. Austin stating that I would take full responsibility for the fence and what I've been doing is snowblowing the snow away from the fence after the plow has passed so that there won't be any pressure on the fence. MRS. GOETZ-One thing I'm concerned about is setting a precedent. you know, like, this may help you. Are the other neighbors going to come in and want the same thing? MR. GRICH-The other neighbors are set back much farther than we are and plus they're not on a hill. We're the only ones that are on the hill, that's the difference. They're on level ground. and the trucks maintain a steady speed. With us. they're accelerating or decelerating. MR. TURNER-You alluded to articles being broken in the house by the heavy equipment? You're on a ledge then. right? MR. GRICH-Very possibly. What happened is little trinkets that we had around would drop off. MR. TURNER-Drop off the shelves. right. MR. GRICH-Right. So we took them off the shelves. Basically. I'm using the same principal as they do when they have a major highway in other areas. They put up a blockade to stop the noise and that's basically what we did. MRS. EGGLESTON-I think I agree with Susan, though. in that if we do grant it. I don't know how we could tell anyone else they couldn't. and maybe it's attractive for that one spot. but maybe you wouldn't like to see them all up and down that road and if you have 1.3 trucks by your house every minute. does your letter say. then that means that all the other houses have the same and their noisy. whether they're upgrading or shifting up and down. They're still noisy going by. MR. GRICH- The fact is that we are much closer to the road than any other houses and we're on a hill and that's the difference. MR. CARR-And I think there is a difference in truck downshifting and a truck at a level speed. MRS. EGGLESTON-There's still the noise. though. MR. CARR-There's still noise. but I think when you have a guy double clutching down the hill. MR. TURNER-He's not going to double clutch down that hill. He's going to have to shift to get up it maybe. but not going down it. MR. CARR-But I think it's going to increase the vibration and the noise put forth by that vehicle. more than a truck just going along at a regular speed that is constant speed. MR. SICARD-I don't know if you know that area going into Co hoes there from the Northway. MR. CARR-Yes. MR. SICARD-There's an eight foot. ten foot fences on both sides of the road. there for that same reason. MR. TURNER-Yes, 787. MR. SICARD-So they must be effective. There's no question about it. MR. GRICH-It's definitely dropped the noise level. There's no question about it. I mean. it's a lli help. MR. KELLEY-I have a couple of questions. One. what is the approximate distance from your house to the property line? 12 ----' MR. GRICH-I bE:lieve it's on t1t: diagram I've provided. MR. KELLEY-It says you've got one inch equals forty feet. MR. GRICH-It's about 40 feet or so. MR. TURNER-I think so. I think I scaled it off and I think it's about 40 feet. MR. KELLEY-And my other question would be, roughly, and I don't expect that you have the exact answer. but what's the distance from the edge of the pavement to your fence? MR. GRICH-I didn't measure it. If I had to guess. it's I'd say between eight and ten feet. MRS. EGGLESTON-So, Jeff, I'm sorry. I didn't hear. What was the distance from the road? MR. KELLEY-Well. the house to the property was somewheres around 40 feet and the distance from the fence to the road is. what, eight to ten feet? MR. TURNER-Right. MR. KELLEY-Because when I went by it, I know the snow is against it. I noticed that because you can see where the plow went along. You kind of wondered what was going to happen to it. It looked li ke the fence was close. but. again. I didn't really pay that much attention. myself, to where the edge of the blacktop was. but I think it's important that we try to get this information. in the future. depending on how this turns out. I think this information will be valuable to us, because somebody else may be 60 feet from the road. where that may be a little different criteria or something. Now. let's see. the shrubs are behind the fence. MR. GRICH-Right. MR. KELLEY-Now. those were kind of large. grown up shrubs. I guess I'll call them. or it's almost a tree of some kind. MR. GRICH-Right. which they were starting to block the view up the road. but with the fence now it's pushed everything back so it's a very clear view. unobstructed. MR. KELLEY-So. obviously. you had these shrubs all along the front. and they were of substantial height because I know they're up over the fence and apparently they weren't doing much to knock the noise down. I mean. I would hope they would do something, but didn't do enough. MR. GRICH-Right. They weren't solid enough across the front. The other thing that was happening. too. was that they were being killed because of the salt because they were so close to the road and from plowing and everything, they were just dying. So. this will help protect them. also. MR. KELLEY-Right. The part of your house that's closest to the road. would that be a living room. probably? MR. GRICH-Exactly. living room and our dining room. MR. KELLEY-All right. and are there bedrooms over that or are they in back of the house? MR. GRICH-They're on the other side of the house. MR. KELLEY-Okay. MRS. GOETZ-I don't have our map, but how close does this come to Light Industrial Zone. your house. because I'm noticing that Silver Bow owns a lot of property around you? MR. GRICH-Right. and Earltown. I believe. is across the street. MR. GORALSKI-That's all SR-IA. MRS. GOETZ-This is SR-IA. and that all is SR-IA? MR. TURNER-Yes. It's all SR. Joe Roulier owns that other piece to the north. MR. GORALSKI-Down at the bottom of the hill, Niagara Mohawk just got a site plan review to put in a Distribution Station. MR. GRICH-I think that noise pollution is a real big problem on that road and it is very difficult to live. even to be out in the yard. let alone be in the house. but to be in the yard and try to do 13 -- anything. it actually shakes you up to have a truck go by and it's just 1Q. loud and so intense. It's very difficult to describe, here. You really have to be there to experience it. MR. SHEA-Jim. you said that you had spoken to someone from the Town Department with regards to the plowing. MR. GRICH-That's correct. MR. SHEA-Did they in any way indicate any difficulty or problems that may arise from having the fence where it is? MR. GRICH-No. They just said that they wanted me to be aware of the fact that. depending on how much snow there was. that it could possibly be damaged when they went by and. basically, what I told them is that I will make sure I snow blow the snow away once they pass and I have done that every time. MR. SHEA-Where do you blow the snow, back out into the road? MR. GRICH-No. I keep working it down so I can get it around the fence. MR. KELLEY-You. apparently. after five o'clock then this traffic drops down. or six. MR. GRICH-It has dropped down more so in the winter. but in the summer. we've had trucks going six o'clock in the morning straight through 'til eight and nine at night. not one a minute. It has dropped down. There are times when we have had 80 trucks an hour go by there. MR. TURNER-Yes, but I think what you're referring to. weren't those trucks hauling fill over to James River Corporation when they were filling the caves in under the mill? MR. GRICH-I don't know what the project was. MR. TURNER-Yes. That's what you're referring to. because they were going north of there to get the sand out of the pit. MR. GRICH-That could be. MR. TURNER-That's why they were using that route. That's going to cease. They're gone. They're done. MR. GRICH-Well. it happened all summer. I don't know if it's going to happen still or not. MR. TURNER-It's not going to happen. That's not going to happen anymore, not that amount of trucks. MR. GRICH-Even to this day. we have heavy equipment going by, cranes. MR. TURNER-That's Light Industrial up there. You're going to have it. MR. GRICH-That's why I feel that we have the right to also have our quality of life. MR. TURNER-You didn't try a four foot fence. though. did you? You just went with the six foot. i rregardless. MR. GRICH-We went with the six foot. yes. because of the height of the trucks. I felt that a four foot fence would do nothing for us. MR. KELLEY-I have a question about your Communications License and this low powered television. don't even know what it is. but it says that you're required to monitor that? MR. GRICH-That's correct. MR. KELLEY-Is this your job? MR. GRICH-Well, I'm the licensee and there are times when we run with no one at master control and on LP TV you can do that, but someone has to monitor the station when that happens. MR. KELLEY-This is local Channel 8? MR. GRICH-8, right. We're under different regulations than a high power station. The high powered station. you need to have someone there all the time running programming or at least in control. Low powers are a little more lax. basically. but there still has to be someone that monitors that and it's normally the licensee and that is myself. MR. KELLEY-Okay. MR. GRICH-And that's a big problem at this point. or it was anyway. I feel I have some different circumstances than a lot of other people. MR. TURNER-This is your full time occupation? 14 - MR. GRICH-Yes. I own the place. MR. TURNER-Okay. but you're operating the business in a residential zone? MR. GRICH-No. I'd be working home. MR. CARR-No. The t.v. station's not out of his office. He's just watching t.v. at home to make sure it stays on the air. MR. GRICH-Right. MR. TURNER-Okay. MR. GRICH-As I say. I think my circumstances are more unique than a lot of the other people on that road. MR. TURNER-Okay. any further questions? I'll open the public hearing, now. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED NO COMMENT PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED CORRESPONDENCE Warren County Planning Board sent it back and said No County Impact MR. TURNER-That's it? What's that letter he gave you? MRS. GOETZ-This is Mr. Grich's letter to Fred Austin at the Warren County Public Works just stating that he would take responsibility for any damage. MR. TURNER-The County plows that. MR. GRICH-That's correct. MRS. GOETZ-And he had a petition from all the neighbors that was submitted. MR. TURNER-Okay. Any further discussion? MR. KELLEY-Well. yes. maybe amongst ourselves. The precedent problem is a toughy. Is there any way to grant a variance. again. with the time frame type thing based on the applicant? In other words, as long as he lives there. under the conditions he's got, but should he go to sell it or move it could he take it back down again? MR. CARR-I think you're creating a monitoring nightmare on that one. I mean. five years from now, the applicant might not remember, or, not to say you wouldn't comply with it. I mean, somebody might buy the house and he goes, okay, we've got to take this fence down and the guy going to say, what, are you crazy and let those trucks through. I mean. then they have to come back. I think it would be. you know. MR. SICARD-The same problems. MR. CARR-Yes. I just can't see putting a time frame. yet. to this person on it. MR. SHEA-The other thing. too. is that he h allowed a four foot fence. MR. TURNER- Yes. MR. SHEA-So we're really talking about two feet of height. MR. KELLEY-Right. MR. TURNER-I just want to raise a question. before we go any farther. about the four foot fence. MRS. COLLARD-We've been allowing four feet. Ted. MR. TURNER-You've been allowing it. but you haven't changed the Ordinance? MRS. COLLARD-We haven't changed the Ordinance. yet. 15 -- MR. GORALSKI-The Town Board has not changed the Ordinance. MRS. COLLARD-Right. MR. TURNER-Right. MRS. COLLARD-But we have been allowing four feet. I don't think you can purchase fence under four feet anymore. MR. TURNER-Well. his is a wooden fence. MRS. COLLARD-But I'm just saying why we have been allowing four feet. MR. SHEA-Yes. because it comes in four and six feet. MRS. COLLARD-Right. So. we had to take it upon ourselves to allow four feet. MR. KELLEY-Can you do that? MRS. COLLARD-Well. I don't know. MR. TURNER-I don't think you can without amending the Ordinance. MR. KELLEY-I mean. I would say what the Ordinance says. Until you get the Ordinance changed. you've got to go by... MRS. COLLARD-Well. do you want to see everybody in here for a four foot fence for a variance? MR. KELLEY-No. I'd be at the Town Board to change their Ordinance. MRS. COLLARD-Well. good luck. MR. TURNER-Well. that's been asked a long. long time ago and they've been sitting on it and haven't done anything with it. MR. CARR-So. it h process then? MR. GORALSKI-Well. it's been in the process for two years. MR. TURNER-It's in limbo more than in process. MR. TURNER-Okay. I don't have a problem with a four foot fence. but I do have a problem with a six foot fence because it's precedent. The applicant said that he's tried a four foot fence and it didn't work. I would have rather had him put the four foot fence up and maybe said that's not enough or tried it or something. MR. SHEA-Well, I certainly can understand the reasoning. but reason that they don't allow. as I understand it. in the Zoning Ordinance, a six foot fence on front yards was probably more for aesthetic reasons than trying to monitor and resolve a particular problem and situation which is a unique one which is really noise related and not having to do with privacy or anything of that sort. MRS. COLLARD-Ted and Sue were on the committee for that. They might be able to help you. MR. TURNER-I'd have to tell you that I basically thought that the reasoning behind the six foot fence was to alleviate any problems with vision. approaching traffic. That's a high fence. MR. SHEA-Right. MR. TURNER-Where a four foot fence. you could sit in the car you could see a car coming up over the hill, where if you had a six foot fence right out by the road. you've got to creep out. get out beyond where you can see and you might get the front end. MR. SHEA-In your mind. does that factor into this situation at all? MR. TURNER-I'm just going to ask him a question. How's your visibility getting out of that driveway? MR. GRICH-It's actually better because we had to cut back the bushes. MR. TURNER-Yes, but I mean. you say you've got ten feet to the property line. to the road. MR. GRICH-Right. but it runs on an angle. 16 .....-' MR. TURNER-Yes. MR. GRICH-So. by the time it hits the driveway. it's actually better. MR. TURNER-You can see up the hill when you come out far enough? MR. GRICH-Yes, very easily. MRS. GOETZ-I drove in the driveway. Joyce and I did. I didn't have a problem coming out. I didn't see any 1.3 cars a minute though. MR. GRICH-Well, this was two months ago. or a month ago. MRS. GOETZ-When you go to the Area Variance portion of the Ordinance. that Number One where we should be looking to see if there's special circumstances or conditions applying to such lands or buildings and not applying generally to the land or buildings in the neighborhood. Just because your house is on a hill doesn't take away the fact. in my mind. that the other houses have a lot of the same problems of the noise. MR. GRICH-But I think we're accentuated because of the noise. because of the hill. You have to realize, when the trucks are going up and down they're putting more pressure on the engines and. therefore it's louder. MR. TURNER-Yes. You have a fellow right across the road that has a house on the other side of the road right under the hill there and he's as close to the road as you are. MR. GRICH-He's down below us. I don't know how close he is. MR. TURNER-Yes. he's as close as you are. MR. GRICH-He's fairly close, but to be honest with you, he's got enough garbage piled up around the house. He probablY doesn't have a sound problem. MRS. EGGLESTON-I must say. Susan. I used to live near the corner of Richardson and Main Street in West Glens Falls. the red light. there, as you know, and night and day it was stopping and starting at the lights by the trucks getting on and off the Northway. That's all you could hear. but yet I can't envision six foot fences up in front of those houses as a protection barrier and. for me, they have the same circumstances. You may be on a hill, that's close to the Northway where they have that traffic and you can't even hear on your telephone in their houses in the summer time. the house right on the corner. I know that for a personal fact. It's really bad and sleeping at night is horrendous. MR. GRICH-One of the actual facts. here, though is. federally. I have to monitor that television station. MRS. EGGLESTON-Well, do you have cable t.v.? MR. GRICH-No. I do not. MRS. EGGLESTON-That's not in your area? MR. GRICH-The only one mile of Queensbury. I think. that doesn't have cable t.v. So, we look at it off the air. MRS. EGGLESTON-But didn't you know that when you bought that house? That you would have to monitor your station and that you were buying into the Industrial Park where there would be. conceivably. a lot of trucks and traffic? MR. GRICH-At the time. there wasn't the traffic that there is now. I mean. you have to look at the building that's gone up in two years. MRS. EGGLESTON-Wouldn't you have expected that? I mean. it's an Industrial Park and, in looking ahead. they're going to build there. MR. GRICH-I was very new to the area. I didn't know exactly how big that project was. Now, I do know. MRS. EGGLESTON-It just would be hard for me to tell people no and yet I can't concei ve of these si x foot high fences in front of people's houses allover and there are other people who have the same circumstances you have. PEGGY GRICH 17 MRS. GRICH-I'm Peggy Grich, and I guess one of the other circumstances is that we don't have neighbors on either side or across. So, it's not going to effect any visibility or any aesthetics of anybody that would be a neighbor or anybody across from us and it probably never will be because there's wetlands down below us and that's been designated wetlands and you can't build there. So. I don't think it's going to effect any other person and that may be a special circumstance to this. Out in the country. there's nobody around it. MR. GRICH-Plus, all of our neighbors signed a petition. I mean, they say that they feel that the fence is a nice looking fence and they have no problem with it. MR. TURNER-They might come here after we grant you the six foot fence and say. we want one. MR. GRICH-But I think that they would have to prove and I feel we have some good points here that they cannot bring to you. MR. TURNER-I think your neighbor down the road. Mr. Fisher. who lives probably as close to the road as you do has a noise problem also. He's back up the road a ways. He's on the other side of the road. and there's another house up there that's right close to the road and they're coming up a hill and they've got to come up that other hill by the airport to get to the top of that and then it flattens out a bit and comes by Airron Industrial Corporation. They're building. coming towards Dix Avenue it would be on the left. All right, and then there's another house that's right up tight to the road. that's closer to the road than your house. and I can't envision. you know. they've got to be suffering the same consequences that you are and you're farther back from the road than they are. MR. GRICH-I think the difference between a four foot and a six foot fence. in our situation. is substantial. We couldn't put a four foot fence up and then change it to a six foot fence because it's economically not feasible for us to do that. MR. TURNER-I understand that. MR. GRICH-And I knew by looking at the truck. just from standing on ground level. the trucks are way up there because the road is actually hi gher than our lawn. So. there's no way that a four foot fence would do anything for us and a six foot fence. even though it's only two feet. it's a sizeable difference and when you are looking at a high truck, it cuts down a lot of noise. There's no question about it. MR. GORALSKI-Mr. Chairman. if I could just make one comment about setting a precedent and it's not particularly to do with this project, but setting a precedent in general. When this Board makes a decision on a certain piece of property or a proposal. that decision is for that proposal and just as you grant setback variances and you don't have to grant everybody a setback variance. because you grant this particular applicant a fence variance doesn't mean you have to grant everybody a fence variance. What you should do is consider whether or not you feel there is a practical difficulty. given the situation on this particular parcel and look at each individual application on its own merits. MR. TURNER-I am. MRS. EGGLESTON-I think we always do that. MR. GORALSKI-I'm just explaining to you what setting a precedent is. that's all. MRS. GOETZ-Mr. Grich has a personal difficulty. because of t.v. Channel 8, it seems to me. I think it makes it worse for him to live there. MR. CARR-It makes it worse. but the noise level. knocking stuff off a mantle is a real problem. MR. TURNER-Okay. Any further comments? Okay. motion's in order. MOTION TO APPROVE AREA VARIANCE NO. 1-1991 JAMES I PEGGY GRICH. Introduced by Bruce Carr who moved for its adoption, seconded by Charles Sicard: I believe the applicant has demonstrated a practical difficulty that is unique to his lot and not applicable to the same degree with other lots in the area. That the strict application of the dimensional requirements of the Ordinance would not alleviate the difficulty of this applicant and would result in a practical difficulty for them. That the purpose of the Ordinance for the fences is aesthetics and safety and that the granting of this variance would not be materially detrimental to that purpose and that public facilities and services would not be adversely effected. That the house in this instance is lower than the road. This particular road we believe to be a 55 MPH zone. The house is located midway on a fairly substantial hill. The house is 40 feet, plus or minus. from the property line. This particular house is located within two miles of an industrial park. Queensbury Avenue is one of the main roads to the industrial park and Mr. Grich's occupation requires that he monitor a low power television set from his home when he's not at his normal place of business. 18 -- Duly adopted this 16th day of January. 1991, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Shea. Mr. Kelley, Mrs. Goetz. Mr. Sicard. Mrs. Eggleston. Mr. Carr. Mr. Turner NOES: NONE MR. KELLEY-What's the speed limit on that road? MR. GRICH-I believe it's 55, there. MRS. GOETZ-Do you think we should include that item about 40 feet back. because that's pretty far back. I looked in the zoning for Suburban Residential and the front only has to be 30 feet back. So. is that a factor? MR. SHEA-It is a factor because that's where his house is. MR. CARR-It's a factor. also, with the speed in front of his house. If it's a 30 mile an hour zone and you're 30 feet. well it might not have the same effect as a 40 foot from a 55 MPH zone. MR. KELLEY-Well. I think 40. because I mean someone may be closer, but they may not have these other criteria. The other thing. well, they may be farther. well. that's going to have less. MR. TURNER-The condition of the road adds a lot to the noise. too. and that road's not in the best of shape. MR. KELLEY-I mean. I'm trying to think of like. there's some people that were in here who wanted a privacy fence on Peggy Ann Road and the guy put the fence up all the way around and this sort of thing. MR. TURNER-Yes. MR. KELLEY-He could say, well, I get a lot of noise from Peggy Ann Road. Well. he doesn't have these same criteria. so I'd say, well. I'm sorry. MRS. GOETZ-I'm getting the feeling that some people are getting upset with the length of this discussion. okay. but this is the purpose of a public hearing, no matter what's on television. So, I reallY feel uncomfortable with people objecting to the fact that I ask a question. Not you. Mr. Grich, but I'd like that in the record. MR. TURNER-Those are good points. because it is a unique situation. in a sense. MR. SICARD-Probably the speed limit needs to be lowered there. too. MRS. EGGLESTON-I'm not sure it's 55 there. MR. TURNER-I don't think that's 55 MPH. MRS. EGGLESTON-I can't believe it is on that. MR. GRICH-It's 45 at the top. for the curves. and then it's not marked. So. if it's not marked. according to the New York State Law. it's 55. MR. SICARD-Is it posted 55? MR. GRICH-It's not posted 55. MR. SICARD-It's not posted 30 either. MR. GRICH-If it's not marked it's 55. MR. SICARD-It's 55. (9:10 p.m.) AREA VARIANCE NO. 2-1991 TYPE II lIR-lA JAMES II. PARRISH OIlNER: JAMES I LOIS PARRISH 529 BIG BAY ROAD, 1 MILE FROM CORINTH ROAD ON RIGHT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A STORAGE SHED THAT WILL BE LESS THAN 20 n. FROM THE REAR AND LESS THAN 20 n. FROM SOUTHERN BOUNDARY LINES. TAX MAP NO. 142-1-1 LOT SIZE: 0.48 ACRES SECTION 4.020-0, 7.074 A1B, C JAMES PARRISH. PRESENT STAFF INPUT Notes from John Goralski. Planner, Area Variance No. 2-1991. James W. Parrish. Dated January 9. 1991. Meeting Date: January 16. 1991 "It does not appear that the strict application of the dimensional 19 requirements of the Ordinance would deprive the applicant of reasonable use of the property. The Board must determine if a practical difficulty exists. Then the Board must determine if the variance requested is the minimal relief necessary. Due to the topography and the layout of the lot, this seems to be the most appropriate location for the shed. I would suggest that the shed be located as close to the blacktop driveway and the existing garage as possible. Perhaps the shed could be constructed as an addition to the garage and not a separate structure. A variance would not be required if the shed were less than 100 square feet." MR. TURNER-Mr. Parrish. that was my question, today. why you couldn't attach that shed that you propose to your garage. where your side door enters your garage and come out there and you'd be on the blacktop. MR. PARRISH-You can't put it there. There's a big pine tree there. MR. TURNER-How close is that pine tree to that garage? I looked at it Sunday. but I didn't notice that pine tree sitting right there. MR. PARRISH-It's maybe two and a half feet or so from the garage. MR. TURNER-Okay. That answers that question. MR. KELLEY-Mr. Parrish. when I looked at this from the roadway. I believe it would be true that if you built the shed you probably couldn't see it for the most part. It's kind of tucked in the back. I guess what I needed a little clarification on, if you look, I guess it would be beyond your property. it looks like there's a mobile home there? MR. PARRISH-Yes. That's owned by somebody else. MR. KELLEY-All right. Now. to get to that mobile home, there would be a road somewhere. MR. PARRISH-There's a right-of-way in the back of my property. MR. KELLEY-Okay. Is the right-of-way between your house and the mobile home. or is the roadway on the other side of the mobile home? MR. PARRISH-No. It's a right-of-way right between the mobile home and my property. MR. TURNER-Doesn't that come out on the road that's to the north. it comes out and comes out on that other road. that right-of-way? MR. PARRISH-It doesn't go all the way through. MR. TURNER-It doesn't go all the way through? MR. PARRISH-It's just a right-of-way. The people next door to me have got that blocked off. MR. TURNER-Okay. MR. PARRISH-It's from Niagara Mohawk, I believe. MRS. EGGLESTON-You don't go through your property. There's no right-of-way through your property to get to the mobile home though? It comes in from the other end? MR. PARRISH-No. That's not my property. MRS. EGGLESTON-Yes. MR. TURNER-Yes. MR. KELLEY-Did you approach those people? Does someone live there year round? MR. PARRISH-No. They haven't lived there in 20 years or so. MR. KELLEY-Was it like a summer time residence or is it just vacant? MR. PARRISH-No. The woman's husband died and she hasn't been there. MRS. EGGLESTON-I think you've tried to buy it. haven't you. several times? MR. PARRISH-Yes. I've tried. I hope to. eventually. I guess I've got first bids on it. MR. TURNER- Yes. 20 MRS. EGGLESTON-Well. could you get by with a 10 by 10. instead of a 12 by 12. then you wouldn't have to be here? MR. PARRISH-Well. that's as low as I'm going to have it. I've got to have it big enough. I've got a lot of garden equipment. I've got roto tillers and garden cart and two tractors. I have a tractor that I keep a snow blower on all the time so I don't have to take it on and off all the time. MR. TURNER-How big is your tractor, 16 horse? MR. PARRISH-I've got one 12 and one 10. MR. KELLEY-And in terms of your family vehicles or cars, do you have two cars? MR. PARRISH-Yes. I do. MR. KELLEY-Okay, so they pretty much take up your garage? MR. PARRISH-Yes. MR. TURNER-Does anyone else have any questions of Mr. Parrish? Any further ones, Jeff? MR. KELLEY-No. In looking at his property. I think his location is probably the best one there is. MRS. EGGLESTON-Yes. MR. TURNER-Yes. I looked at it from the road. in there, but I didn't notice that one. Okay. I never noticed that tree. I'll open the public hearing. I noticed a lot of trees PUBLIC HEARING OPENED NO COMMENT PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED MR. TURNER-Okay. a motion's in order. MOTION TO APPROVE AREA VARIANCE NO. 2-1991 JAMES W. PARRISH. Introduced by Jeffrey Kelley who moved for its adoption. seconded by Bruce Carr: The variance is for side yard and rear yard setback. The Ordinance calls for 20 feet from both the side yard and the rear yard and the applicant is asking for a setback of 10 feet from the side yard and the rear yard. It appears that this is a reasonable request and the building he wants to build is 12 by 12. It seems to be the minimum sized building necessary to house two garden tractors. a roto tiller. and lawn cart which Mr. Parrish uses to maintain his property and garden. From a visual aspect. this seems to be the best location for the building and he does have some other practical difficulties on this particular lot. It does not seem possible to put an addition on his existing garage unless large trees were removed. On the easterly side of his garage there is a gully and this prohibits an expansion on this side. There is no neighborhood opposition. It does not appear to be detrimental to the purposes of the Ordinance. Public facilities would not be adversely effected and this would give him reasonable use of his land. Duly adopted this 16th day of January. 1991. by the following vote: AYES: Mrs. Goetz. Mr. Kelley. Mr. Shea. Mr. Carr. Mrs. Eggleston. Mr. Sicard, Mr. Turner NOES: NONE (9:23 p.m.) MR. TURNER-We have one more item to take care of that's not on that agenda and that's relative to the decision we made in reference to the request from the Planning Board in the matter of Michael and Martha Hogan and the Section of the Ordinance was Section 9, Article 9.011 B and that was in reference to the 50 percent expansion. This was appealed with them as the applicant. So. what this has done has put them in a position where they have to get a variance for the 50 percent expansion. The Planning Board has already approved the site plan and in the minutes of their meeting, it indicated that they didn't want to cause the Hogans any further problems, any further reviews. They realized that that 50 percent expansion did apply. but they want to take that out of there. amend the motion. I think what we should do is amend our motion. the last time. and clarify that that Section does apply. in reference to !!!X. 50 percent expansion. Therefore. it takes the monkey off of the Hogan's back. They don't have to apply for that variance. which this. in effect. makes them have to apply for. They can get a permit to build it. MRS. EGGLESTON-We can't just give them a variance? 21 -- MR. TURNER-Well. there wasn't any intention of the Planning Board. I don't think. in the first place. to put us in this position or put the Hogans in that position. MRS. EGGLESTON-Right. MR. TURNER-I think what they were looking for was a clarification from us that that section does apply. MRS. EGGLESTON-But we can't just give them the variance without them going all back through the agenda again and all of that? Wouldn't that do the same? MR. TURNER-What I'm saying is we don't want to make them go for a variance because it's not really necessary. It puts them in a bad light. MR. CARR-Could you just review their project for my knowledge? MR. TURNER-It was on Glen Lake. MR. CARR- Yes. MR. TURNER-All right. What it was was a rebuild. They were going to tear the camp down. MR. CARR-Okay. MR. TURNER-It was out on, what's the name of the point. Michael? MICHAEL O'CONNOR MR. O'CONNOR-It's called Pioneer Point. MR. TURNER-Pioneer Point. MR. O'CONNOR-It's at the end of Fitzgerald Road. MR. CARR-Okay. MR. TURNER-And what it amounted to was, I think initially, the house was something like 800 and some square feet. the camp? MR. O'CONNOR-Nine hundred square feet. MR. TURNER-About eight or nine hundred square feet. MR. O'CONNOR-It was a single story house with 900 some odd feet. MR. GORALSKI-Mike. could you use the microphone. MR. O'CONNOR-Michael O'Connor from the firm of Little and O'Connor. I represented Mr. and Mrs. Hogan who were here before this Board for a variance because the lot was not on a Town Road and because we needed a variance under Section 267 of the Town Law. I think. because it also was not on a Town Road. and then I represented them before the Planning Board and they did their site plan review. It was a single family residence on Pioneer Point. a small lot. It was a one story dwelling which had 900 and some odd feet on the first floor. We asked permission and went through the whole process. getting interpretations from the Zoning Administrator and variances from the Planning Board for the right to build a one and a half story. if you will, on the same foot print. There was not an expansion of the footprint. We're going to use the same footprint. We went up and on the second floor, we went to the outside of the perimeters, there's about 800 feet there, but some of that footage is knee walls. It's not 800 feet of living space and at the time we went through the initial process, we were told that we did not need a variance from the 50 foot provision. That came up the night of the site plan review and the Planning Board passed a resolution. after discussing the 50 percent provision. saying we are not going to hold this against the applicant. The applicant has done all the plans. engineering and everything else based upon what the applicant has been told at this point, but for future references. we want to get a determination. and then they appealed it and then it went around the process. and somebody said you can't appeal it on a general sense. MR. GORALSKI-Right. MR. O'CONNOR-You've got to put somebody's application name on it. So, they said we're appealing the Hogan determination, which in fact was long made. well in excess of the 30 days prior to the time that they actually made the appeal. which is a technical thing. but it's also a valid defense to question a requirement to have a variance. I went back to the Planning Board, when I found out about that. and I said. do you mean that this is going to effect the Hogan application. They said. no, and I was there the night before your meeting. I would like. for the purposes of your record. to indicate I 22 was told by the Planning Board they would request this Board to adjourn consideration of that application. last month until they had opinion from Counsel as to whether or not they were. in fact. barred from making the appeal. in the form that it finally got into, as to the Hogan application because of the 30 day requirement. but your Board heard the application the next night and made your determination. I would have appeared that night and made the same arguments 1'm making tonight. if I thought it was going to be on your agenda. but I was at the Planning Board. They made an actual motion in which they were going to ask your Board not to consider the application. So. basically. I think if you went back and you looked at all the Planning Board minutes, they are saying that they wanted a general interpretation from you. but they did not want you to say that the Hogans had to get a variance for this particular provision. MR. TURNER-Yes. but the fact of the matter, as Mike said. that when it got kicked around. we had to put it in an applicant's name to decide it. okay. and so that's where we are. MRS. GOETZ-You're saying that we need to go back to our original motion when we granted the variance? MR. TURNER-No. Not the variance, the interpretation. MRS. GOETZ-The interpretation? MR. TURNER-The appeal. MRS. GOETZ-Okay. It's Appeal No. 5-90? MR. TURNER-Yes. MR. KELLEY-What do we have to do? Change in it some way? MR. TURNER-No. I think we can just withdraw that motion and just say to the Planning Board that it's our determination that Article 9.011 B does apply in all matters as stated in the Ordinance and related. That the 50 percent expansion does apply.... MR. DUSEK-Mr. Chairman, if I may just make a suggestion. Perhaps an easy way to resolve it for the Board would be that, quite typically, when courts, and you're a quasi jUdicial body yourself. are faced with an issue such as this. if they can decide it on procedural grounds, they do that, and in some instances they go on, then. to comment on what the law is. For instance. in this type of case. if you wanted to, you could certainly say that the application wasn't timely. so therefore it's automatically dismissed as against the Hogans. However. you'll go on and comment on what that law says so that everybody knows, in the future. and perhaps that would satisfactorily address it for everybody. MR. TURNER-That would take care of it, yes. MR. CARR-But didn't we discuss this with Tim Barber and all that, about what the gross floor area, is that what they're asking us to do is say that gross floor area doesn't encompass both floors? I'm not sure what they're asking us to do to avoid them having to get a variance. MR. DUSEK-Well. think they're saying. procedurally, to say that it has been brought up. MR. CARR-Well. I know, procedurally, and that's probably a good solution for this particular case. if that's the desire. but. I mean, what is the Planning Board asking us to do about 9.011 B? MR. DUSEK-Well. I think you've already done that. MR. GORALSKI-You've already done that when you made your interpretation. MRS. GOETZ-Do you want me to read it? MR. TURNER-Yes. MRS. GOETZ-Everybody voted for it, and it was "Motion on Notice of Appeal No. 5-90. requested by the Queensbury Planning Board. regarding the decision of the Zoning Administrator in the matter of the Hogan Site Plan No. 76-90. We disagree with the Zoning Administrator's interpretation of Section 9.011 B as it pertains to Site Plan No. 76-90. We feel that, in reference to Site Plan No. 76-90, Michael and Martha Hogan, that no enlargement or rebuilding shall exceed an aggregate of 50 percent of the gross floor area of such single family dwelling or mobile home immediately prior to the commencement of the first enlargement or rebuilding." MR. TURNER-That's right out of the Ordinance. MR. CARR-Yes. MRS. GOETZ-What was said is that they do have to come in for a variance. 23 '-- MR. TURNER-They do have to come. MR. CARR-Ri ght. MRS. EGGLESTON-Yes. if they expand more than 50 percent. MR. CARR-I still agree they should have done that. MRS. GOETZ-Right. but it was too late for this particular one. MR. DUSEK-Right, and what I'm saying is you can stand by that. Under the suggestion I have, you could simply say that their application's too late. However, in this application and in other applications similar to it. this is the way it is, just like you said. MR. CARR-I don't think we have to because we've already got that motion on there. So. all we've got to do is say this one's too late and refer back to other motions. MR. DUSEK-However. just to make it clear that the Hogans do not have to have anything further done. MR. TURNER-Yes. that's all. Okay. Do you want to word it like that? MR. CARR-I mean. does the Board want to bring the Hogans in here to look over this project again, to discuss it? MR. TURNER-No. They've already been through the site plan. It's already been approved. MR. CARR-All right. I'm just asking the Board. because I mean maybe somebody actually wants to bring them in here for a variance. MR. TURNER-Does anybody want to bring them in? I didn't think so. MRS. GOETZ-Well, I don't think we'd have a leg to stand on. would we? MR. CARR-No. MR. TURNER-No. MR. DUSEK-I think maybe your motion should be to amend and supplement your previous decision to add that information. MR. CARR-Was it not timely back then, too? MR. DUSEK-Right. that's the problem. MR. GORALSKI-Right. MR. CARR-All right. MOTION THAT THE APPEAL BY THE PLANNING BOARD lIAS NOT TIMELY, BUT FOR MATTER OF INTERPRETATION ONLY, MOTION ON NOTICE OF APPEAL NO. 5 REQUESTED BY THE QUEEIISBURY PLANNING BOARD REGARDING THE DECISION OF THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR IN THE MATTER OF THE HOGAN SITE PLAN NO. 76. WE DISAGREE WITH THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S INTERPRETATION OF SECTION 9.011 B AS IT PERTAINS TO SITE PLAN 11). 76. WE FEEL THAT IN REFERENCE TO SITE PLAN NO. 76, MICHAEL AND MARTHA HOGAN, THAT NO ENLARGEMENT OR REBUILDING SHALL EXCEED AN AGGREGATE OF 50 PERCENT OF THE GROSS FLOOR AREA OF SUCH SINGLE FAJIIIL Y DWELLING OR IIJUILE HOME IMMEDIATELY PRIOR TO THE COlltENCEMENT OF THE FIRST ENLARGEMENT OR REBUILDING., Introduced by Bruce Carr who moved for its adoption. seconded by Theodore Turner: Duly adopted this 16th day of January. 1991. by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Shea. Mr. Sicard. Mrs. Goetz. Mrs. Eggleston, Mr. Kelley. Mr. Carr, Mr. Turner NOES: NONE MR. GORALSKI-Now. you have to do elections for Chairman and Secretary. MOTION RECOlltEND TO THE TOWN BOARD THAT TED TURNER BE REAPPOINTED AS CHAIRMAN OF THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS. Introduced by Susan Goetz who moved for its adoption. seconded by Joyce Eggleston: Duly adopted this 16th day of January. 1991, by the following vote: AYES: Mrs. Eggleston. Mr. Sicard. Mrs. Goetz. Mr. Kelley. Mr. Shea. Mr. Carr, Mr. Turner NOES: NONE 24 '~ MOTION TO RECOMMEND TO THE TOWN BOARD THAT SUE GOETZ BE REAPPOINTED AS SECRETARY OF THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS. Introduced by Bruce Carr who moved for its adoption. seconded by Michael Shea: Duly adopted this 16th day of January, 1991. by the following vote: AYES: Mrs. Eggleston. Mr. Sicard. Mrs. Goetz. Mr. Kelley. Mr. Shea, Mr. Carr, Mr. Turner NOES: NONE MOTION TO RECOMMEND TO THE TOWN BOARD THAT BRUCE CARR BE APPOINTED AS VICE CHAIRMAN OF THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS. Introduced by Michael Shea who moved for its adoption. seconded by Joyce Eggleston: Duly adopted this 16th day of January, 1991. by the following vote: AYES: Mrs. Eggleston. Mr. Sicard. Mrs. Goetz. Mr. Kelley. Mr. Shea. Mr. Carr. Mr. Turner NOES: NONE MR. TURNER-We'll vote on all three offices at the same time. Mr. Dusek would like to talk to us about a matter. MR. DUSEK-To do this officially. and to keep the comments on the case out of the record. since it's in litigation. could I ask the Board to make a motion and vote on going into Executive Session? MR. TURNER-Yes. MOTION TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SECTION. Introduced by Theodore Turner who moved for its adoption. seconded by Joyce Eggleston: Duly adopted this 16th day of January, 1991. by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Carr. Mrs. Eggleston. Mr. Sicard. Mrs. Goetz, Mr. Kelley. Mr. Shea. Mr. Turner NOES: NONE MOTION TO COME OUT OF EXECUTIVE SESSION. Introduced by Theodore Turner who moved for its adoption, seconded by Joyce Eggleston: Duly adopted this 16th day of January. 1991. by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Shea. Mr. Kelley. Mrs. Goetz. Mr. Sicard. Mrs. Eggleston. Mr. Carr, Mr. Turner NOES: NONE On motion meeting was adjourned. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED. Theodore Turner. Chairman 25